The Art of the Postmortem Photo

Star Tribune ^ | November 4, 2005 | Peg Meier

[wallcrawlr]

Photographs of dead people, even dead children? Too weird for your taste?

Hold on a minute.

Photos of the dead served a purpose in the 1800s, when most families didn't have snapshots and photo albums.

The photos "were life-affirming rather than creepy and macabre, as most people think of them today," said Jack Kabrud, director and curator of the Hennepin History Museum. Its exhibit on the topic is called "A Semblance of Life: The Art and Culture of the Post Mortem Photograph," with about 50 photos from the 1850s to as late as the 1940s.

"These photos were the final gift to the survivors," Kabrud said. "It was something they could hold."

For many, the picture of a body in a coffin or propped up in a lifelike pose was the only image a family had of a deceased loved one. In many cases, friends and relatives far away -- some in the "old country" overseas -- had no way to get to a dying person or a funeral in time, and they treasured a picture of the deceased.

Some photos tear your heart out. There's one from 1912 of a deceased mother "holding" her living infant. There's another of little John Alexander Haley, 6 months and 11 days old, taken after his death.

Few people could afford postmortem photos. They were a luxury, especially if the family hired a professional photographer to arrange the scene and lighting. But the tradition was followed in cultures worldwide.

Some photos are from the History Museum's collections, but most are owned by Caitlin Karolczak, 21, an artist who recently graduated from the University of Minnesota in studio art.

[Fintan]

 

Finally...an explanation.